apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henry Jen <henry...@ztune.net>
Subject Re: [Vote] apr-util 1.5.x -> trunk
Date Thu, 07 Oct 2010 16:36:13 GMT
2010/10/7 Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm>:
> On 07 Oct 2010, at 12:22 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
>> These choices seem skewed to me.  "apr is apr-util/trunk" is a
>> different concept than "rename 1.5.x to trunk."  Conceptually, "apr is
>> apr-util trunk" whatever we decide.
>
> I disagree, in the past, we had two projects, each with an independent trunk
> and release cycle, one called apr, the other called apr-util. We have chosen
> to retire the apr-util project, and have copied the functionality into apr,
> but that doesn't make the apr-util project go away.
>
> We will still need to make releases on apr-util in the v1.x series, and we
> may need to bump v1.3 to v1.4, etc. For this, we need a properly functional
> trunk, otherwise those following the standard svn conventions face problems.
>

To me, I only care two things,

1. trunk should be where the latest development is going on.
2. avoid to have two different development tree(fork)

Seems to me, apr-util is merged into apr project and should have the
same release cycle. apr-util should only be maintained for sustaining
old releases but not new ones.

My understanding could be wrong, this is why we need clarification for
people like me.

Cheers,
Henry

Mime
View raw message